Some nice person (not me) on a newsgroup far far away posted the following ...

name withheld wrote:

In keeping with their magnanimous spirit, here are the direct download URLs, so you don't have to deal with their email address demands (for sale and spamming), or fight their improper use of javascript:

That's good. Thanks for posting the link. I work for Futron, and contributed to the report. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Given recent events, we're probably going to revisit the forecast. The numbers are good, but we need to factor in Branson's purchase of Scaled Composites' technology, as well as the six other companies who are apparently working with Mojave Aerospace Ventures.

Ok, I'll bite. Remember that this is in the spirit of destruct-testing something in the hopes that the subject is indestructable (i.e. I don't hate Futron).

So, given that in the STMS_Suborbital.pdf (specifically in the Methodology section) where there is this statement ...

STMS_Suborbital.pdf wrote:

Futron bases its suborbital travel forecast on the potential pool of customers for the service.

Shouldn't you have added something like "... and on forecast technological capabilities of suborbital travel services." ... no? I skimmed through the methodology section and found nothing about connecting supply (future vehicles) with demand (future tourists).

In fact, in the very next section you have a part which says ...

STMS_Suborbital.pdf wrote:

The suborbital survey results and forecast were generated with one underlying assumption: currently no specific vehicle exists. Expanding the analysis to include specific vehicles or characteristics associated with them would impact the target market and associated forecast.

Doesn't this, largely, hamstring the current report's likely accuracy? The whole validity of a forecast lies in its background assumptions, and it reads very much like that Futron's conclusions ... being the results of the first serious attempts at this sort of study ... should be regarded with extreme caution.

However, I await your next forecast with less skepticism (no doubt you will have more data to improve upon the first effort).

That's good. Thanks for posting the link. I work for Futron, and contributed to the report. If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Given recent events, we're probably going to revisit the forecast. The numbers are good, but we need to factor in Branson's purchase of Scaled Composites' technology, as well as the six other companies who are apparently working with Mojave Aerospace Ventures.